Tim Harford, economics writer, explores the hubris of experts and the role of experimentation in innovation and problem solving (by way of Gary Gruber). How might one work to encourage experimentation and open-mindedness in a school?
Tim Harford, economics writer, explores the hubris of experts and the role of experimentation in innovation and problem solving (by way of Gary Gruber). How might one work to encourage experimentation and open-mindedness in a school?
Now that I have attended a five-day leadership institute, it is time to return to school and put newly learned team-building strategies into practice. To have the courage to try them, I must trust the wisdom of experts more knowledgeable and experienced than me. It reminds me of the classic pendulum demonstration (video below). Will these techniques work, or will I take a blow to the face?
While at the Santa Fe Leadership Center institute, I noticed the the theme of team preparation through personal sharing repeatedly receive emphasis. Invest time and energy into the personal histories and goals of team members, and the team will perform at a higher level and accomplish more.
Tomi Nagai-Roethe shared the Drexler/Sibbet team performance model with us. The model provides a detailed framework for understanding team functions and dysfunctions. Built around the metaphor of a bouncing ball, the model emphasizes the importance of personalized team preparation to the later performance level of the team. Early phases of teamwork include individuals sharing who they are and why there are on the team. This precedes articulation of the work to be done or the methods to be used. The floor represents organizational support. With strong support, the ball bounces faster and higher. The vertical axis represents different behavioral dimensions — intuition, feeling, thinking, and sensing. Exploring personal histories and purposes require intuition and feeling skills. The more work a team does to explore the background and motivation of each team member and their reasons for being on the team, the more momentum the team builds to accomplish great work.
Carla Silver put this theory into action through a wallet building exercise. The ultimate objective of the activity was to build the perfect wallet, but before we were even given our task, we were told to show and explain each of our wallets. This individual sharing of the wallets we had chosen for ourselves gave each person the opportunity to speak, make their preferences known, and show their chosen wallets before group work began. As a result, the group was more trusting and collaborative throughout the entire process.
Debbie Freed explored systems causes for conflict and crises in schools. Similarly to the other speakers, she explained how issues framed around personality conflicts are really about the assumptions that people bring to their jobs as a result of their personal and institutional histories.
IDEO had us practice design thinking to design a better recess for kids. They emphasized personal history through “user-centered design,” asking interview subjects open-ended questions and conducting observations to identify user needs and brainstorm possible solutions.
The idea of personal experience in teamwork seems readily applicable in our work in schools.
Today, Debbie Freed taught us about systems thinking, a framework for understanding school conflict and dilemmas through their underlying causes. She urged us to identify: 1) what is the presenting issue; 2) what is the real issue; 3) why now? Issues framed in terms of personalities are nearly always reflective of systems conditions within a school. Is the presenting issue really the issue or just a symptom of a deeper issue? Who did a new staff member replace? Who really makes decisions within the school? How does the school’s history inform current conflicts? How do people’s belief systems inform our understanding of conflicts?
For some reason, I have thought of schools in this way for a long time. My introduction to Catlin Gabel helped deepen this understanding, as I found myself on the wrong side of a staff replacement scenario and learned to understand the place of the technology department within a complex web of decision-making entities.
Debbie encourages us to first understand ourselves and what role we play within the system. Leaders should define reality, in opposition to crisis. Leaders should exercise clarity, articulation, and alignment. People rise to the occasion when they know their purpose, role and are held accountable. Often missing from schools are effective accountability measures (e.g., evaluation and professional development), due to a culture norm of conflict avoidance.
My favorite quote of the day: “some people think that shared decision-making means that you make a decision and then share it!”
Here is a pretty interesting comment on the use of 360° reviews for performance assessment.
A study on the patterns of rater accuracy shows that length of time that a rater has known the person being rated has the most significant effect on the accuracy of a 360-degree review. The study shows that subjects in the group “known for one to three years” are the most accurate, followed by “known for less than one year,” followed by “known for three to five years” and the least accurate being “known for more than five years.” The study concludes that the most accurate ratings come from knowing the person long enough to get past first impressions, but not so long as to begin to generalize favorably (Eichinger, 2004).
Wikipedia article on 360° reviews
I held this position from 2002-2006.
San Francisco University High School (UHS) seeks to appoint an experienced Director of Technology.
Reporting to the Head of School, manages IT infrastructure supporting all academic, administrative and development functions of the school. Supervises direct staff of three and coordinates with Academic Technology Coordinator and the Academic Dean. The school is a dual platform environment. The network consists primarily of HP Proliant servers running Windows 2008 Server in a VMWare environment with a Hitachi SAN with 8 Terrabytes of storage. Distribution is through a Cisco-based campus-wide gigabit Fiber-optic backbone supporting wired and wireless access for approx. 230 workstations. The school is implementing a campus-wide 1-1 iPad program in the fall of 2011.
The successful candidate will have experience in an academic environment and demonstrated success in technology administration and project management. Ability to communicate and work collaboratively with varying levels of technical sophistication is very important.
Send resume and cover letter to:
Jim Chestnut
San Francisco University High School
3065 Jackson Street
San Francisco, CA 94115or email to jim.chestnut@sfuhs.org
No phone calls please!
Teachers, parents, and students often ask our IT department to support new technologies that have just gained popularity in the home consumer market. The latest darling is iOS devices, particularly the iPad.
How may we anticipate the future enterprise growth of a new, personal technology? What qualities of home electronics help predict future success in the enterprise? I would appreciate your thoughts and any resources you have encountered that address this topic.
One useful idea is the technology adoption curve. Actually, “curves” is a better word, as I have come across several different types.

Source: Wikipedia
As people adopt a technology, overall adoption increases toward the technology’s “saturation point,” the maximum penetration possible for that technology. The maximum point is usually less than 100% of the possible users in existence (more on that later).
Source: Wikipedia
Some studies have found a gap between the early adopters and early majority, suggesting that some innovations do not proceed directly from minority to mainstream adoption.
Source: Nielsen Company
For some technologies, this gap represents the end of the road. The technology never gains mainstream acceptance, either because it is ill-suited to the mainstream or because another technology supersedes it (see “Laser disc” and “Blu-Ray”).
These graphs help answer the early adopters when they come calling. Early acceptance of a new technology does not guarantee its popularity with the mainstream.
This chart shows the adoption curves for major household electronics.
Source and full-size version: Karl Hartig
Note that the chart is limited to technology innovations that succeeded in gaining a high adoption level! Also note that the early rate of increase does not necessarily predict its later rate of increase. Compare cellphone adoption to cable TV. Cell phones started slowly and then rapidly increased in adoption. Cable TV started quickly and then tapered off. The following chart describes the adoption curve of a less successful technology. The y-axis represents “visibility.”
Source: Mike Slinn
The previous graphs focus primarily on consumer technologies. What about organizations such as companies and schools? Typically schoolwide implementation lies at the end of the adoption curve. The following chart proposes that adoption moves progressively from smaller to larger organizational groups.
Source: James Rait

I wonder what qualities these successful innovations share. Ease of use? Utility to the user? What can we learn to help us understand the potential future popularity of newer devices like the iPad?
Suitability for an enterprise network: Technologies that integrate well with enterprise networks have a greater chance of success in schools than those that do not. The iPad is poised on the brink of this question. Apple did a nice job with WPA2 enterprise integration for iOS. What about print and file servers?
Applicability to teaching and learning activities: It appears that major manufacturers are not seriously interested in designing technologies for the education market. We are left to choose among richly designed technologies for personal or business use and less mature technologies designed by smaller companies specifically for the education market. When a new technology arrives on the scene, we should first ask whether it is at all suitable to teaching and learning activities. I am not talking about “finding a use” for a new device, but rather identifying high compatibility between a device’s capabilities and existing principles of good teaching and learning, which make it possible to replace and/or extend existing learning environments with technology.
Potential for content creation: Learning is as much about content creation as it is about consumption. Devices like the iPad are rich with consumption capabilities but so far weak for creation. If creation represents at least half of the education process, then what use is the iPad today, compared to a $500 laptop computer?
“Every school will have a 1:1 student laptop program.” One no longer hears this once-popular refrain. The adoption of student laptop programs has clearly slowed since 2000, and still only a small proportion of schools overall provide individual student laptops. High cost, disillusionment about effects, and difficult of integration have proven to be significant obstacles. Do you know of any quantitative studies of student laptop program adoption? I would like to see them.
Are you on the “cutting edge” or a “fast follower?” How do you mediate the effects of new technology enthusiasm on your organization? Have you measured the percentage of your budget devoted to innovation? What resources have you found to be helpful in investigating these questions? I look forward to your replies.
The Santa Fe Leadership Institute has dedicated their monthly newsletter to technology. Check it out.
Take a look at how an independent school can invest in its technology and personnel by taking a closer look at the ways in which the school’s leadership promotes communication. Continue reading →
How does one design rich learning opportunities that will make the greatest difference for students? Continue reading →
Are new teaching methodologies and new technologies considered “fads”? Continue reading →
If anyone is ready to lead the technology revolution in schools, it is Rob Greco. Continue reading →
I find that teachers are most receptive to new information at the start of the year. Each year, I make a series of presentations at the opening meetings of each division in our schools. This year, I focused on training, network changes, annual reminders, and examples of student and teacher online publishing. Here are my slides for this year. Please find presentation notes below.
As the school year comes to an end, I am working on the following projects.
How about you?